[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1fa6d42d-0f2d-2db6-47ad-d1ae06e13f02@kernel.org>
Date: Sat, 20 May 2017 20:18:15 -0700
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
To: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
devel@...uxdriverproject.org
Cc: Stephen Hemminger <sthemmin@...rosoft.com>,
Jork Loeser <Jork.Loeser@...rosoft.com>,
Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@...rosoft.com>, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 04/10] x86/hyper-v: fast hypercall implementation
On 05/19/2017 07:09 AM, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> Hyper-V supports 'fast' hypercalls when all parameters are passed through
> registers. Implement an inline version of a simpliest of these calls:
> hypercall with one 8-byte input and no output.
>
> Proper hypercall input interface (struct hv_hypercall_input) definition is
> added as well.
>
> Signed-off-by: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>
> Acked-by: K. Y. Srinivasan <kys@...rosoft.com>
> Tested-by: Simon Xiao <sixiao@...rosoft.com>
> Tested-by: Srikanth Myakam <v-srm@...rosoft.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/include/asm/mshyperv.h | 39 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/hyperv.h | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 58 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/mshyperv.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/mshyperv.h
> index e293937..028e29b 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/mshyperv.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/mshyperv.h
> @@ -216,6 +216,45 @@ static inline u64 hv_do_hypercall(u64 control, void *input, void *output)
> #endif /* !x86_64 */
> }
>
> +/* Fast hypercall with 8 bytes of input and no output */
> +static inline u64 hv_do_fast_hypercall8(u16 code, u64 input1)
> +{
> + union hv_hypercall_input control = {0};
> +
> + control.code = code;
> + control.fast = 1;
> +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
> + {
> + u64 hv_status;
> +
> + __asm__ __volatile__("call *%3"
> + : "=a" (hv_status),
> + "+c" (control.as_uint64), "+d" (input1)
> + : "m" (hv_hypercall_pg)
> + : "cc", "r8", "r9", "r10", "r11");
> + return hv_status;
> + }
> +#else
> + {
> + u32 hv_status_hi, hv_status_lo;
> + u32 input1_hi = (u32)(input1 >> 32);
> + u32 input1_lo = (u32)input1;
> +
> + __asm__ __volatile__ ("call *%6"
> + : "=d"(hv_status_hi),
> + "=a"(hv_status_lo),
> + "+c"(input1_lo)
> + : "d" (control.as_uint32_hi),
> + "a" (control.as_uint32_lo),
> + "b" (input1_hi),
> + "m" (hv_hypercall_pg)
> + : "cc", "edi", "esi");
> +
> + return hv_status_lo | ((u64)hv_status_hi << 32);
> + }
> +#endif
This is going to need an explicit "sp" annotation to force a stack
frame, I think. Otherwise objtool is likely to get mad in a
frame-pointer-omitted build.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists